Iraq & Vietnam

[JerrySeinfeld]

I read somewhere that the total deaths of American soldiers in Iraq is about 2200, which compares with ONE MONTH (May, 1968) worth of deaths in Vietnam.

If this is true, then why do some hollywood-types-turned political "experts" keep comparing the two wars.

From what I have seen, the Iraq war is quite successful. Sure, Bagdad and the Sunni triangle are messy, but the majority of the country is quite civil and stable.

in a December 2005 poll, 68% of Iraqis said life is good, compared with 19% and 23% in france and germany respectively.

The lefty media wants a civil war so badly. But sometimes wishes don't come true.

Is anyone else a little tired of the false Vietnam comparison?

[BubberMiley]

Vietnam didn't break international law like Iraq did, so it was more justifiable.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Vietnam didn't break international law like Iraq did, so it was more justifiable.

Actually Iraq broke international law by flouting UN sanctions imposed after gulf war in 1992.

The US merely enforced those long broken sanctions.

International law became a joke when the UN refused to enforce it's own sanctions.

Nuff said.

[Big Blue Machine]

Both share the realization that there was a military option but not a military solution to the problem.

[geoffrey]

Against Vietnam, it was against a state aggressor. In Iraq, its against civlian terrorists. Different concept.

[August1991]

There have been about 2,000 American soldiers killed so far in Iraq since 2003 and about 30,000 Iraqis.

To compare, there were about 55,000 American soldiers killed in Vietnam between 1954 and 1973, and about 1 million Vietnamese.

To compare further, there were about 20,000 Lebanese killed in the Lebanese Civil War between 1975 and 1992, and about 200,000 were killed in Chechnya since 1994 (of which at least 11,000 Russian soldiers).

Another comparison I recall is what took almost 20 years in Beirut, took 2 years in Sarajevo and 2 months in Grozny.

These pictures from northern Iraq (Erbil) are in many ways typical for the Middle East, if one allows for Erbil being largely Kurdish. This blog, by a young girl, is also interesting.

Kurds, of course, are a distinct group in the Middle East. The best way for English-Canadians to understand that is to think of Quebecers. I don't envy the American situation in Iraq because it is like an alien force getting mixed up in Canada's constitutional squabbles.

[geoffrey]

Great photos and really moving blog!

It encourages me to hear from people like this within Iraq. It definitely makes the efforts worth it. Hopefully this girl gets to go to university.

[BubberMiley]

There have been about 2,000 American soldiers killed so far in Iraq since 2003 and about 30,000 Iraqis.

Actually 30,000 Iraqis was Bush's own unofficial out-of-left-field estimate. Chances are he would downplay the numbers. Conservative estimates are more in the range of 100,000. Others go as high as 250,000.

[geoffrey]

There have been about 2,000 American soldiers killed so far in Iraq since 2003 and about 30,000 Iraqis.

Actually 30,000 Iraqis was Bush's own unofficial out-of-left-field estimate. Chances are he would downplay the numbers. Conservative estimates are more in the range of 100,000. Others go as high as 250,000.

Still no Vietnam. I'd also say numbers from Amnesty would be grossly over reported. The same organization that repeatly condemned the millions that died under Saddam's hand that apparently isn't too pro getting rid of him either...

[BubberMiley]

The Lancet Medical Journal from Johns Hopkins University did an intensive study in 2004 and came up with 100,000, half of them women and children.

[GostHacked]

The Lancet Medical Journal from Johns Hopkins University did an intensive study and came up with 150,000, mostly women and children.

I calculated and took an average of 30 people being killed every day there. Now that may be a bit high, but some times it is 10 sometimes it is 100 for the day. So even if 30/day over the last 3 years gives me

30 x 3 x 365 = 32,850 I think that number is low personaly. But this is just an average. I would guess that the numbers are closer to 100,000 deaths.

[JerrySeinfeld]

The Lancet Medical Journal from Johns Hopkins University did an intensive study and came up with 150,000, mostly women and children.

I calculated and took an average of 30 people being killed every day there. Now that may be a bit high, but some times it is 10 sometimes it is 100 for the day. So even if 30/day over the last 3 years gives me

30 x 3 x 365 = 32,850 I think that number is low personaly. But this is just an average. I would guess that the numbers are closer to 100,000 deaths.

This still pales in comparison to the 1-2 million infants and childeren who were systematically starved to death under the 10 year UN sanction program. Keep those numbers rolling if Saddam is still in power and you'll see your US "invasion" looks like a cakewalk compared to the "Saddam in power" alternative.

Keep up the good work GWB.

[GostHacked]

The Lancet Medical Journal from Johns Hopkins University did an intensive study and came up with 150,000, mostly women and children.

I calculated and took an average of 30 people being killed every day there. Now that may be a bit high, but some times it is 10 sometimes it is 100 for the day. So even if 30/day over the last 3 years gives me

30 x 3 x 365 = 32,850 I think that number is low personaly. But this is just an average. I would guess that the numbers are closer to 100,000 deaths.

This still pales in comparison to the 1-2 million infants and childeren who were systematically starved to death under the 10 year UN sanction program. Keep those numbers rolling if Saddam is still in power and you'll see your US "invasion" looks like a cakewalk compared to the "Saddam in power" alternative.

Keep up the good work GWB.

And go check for the last 30 years how many sanctions the US has voted yes on. And see what other countries were involved. The list goes on. Terrible

[geoffrey]

Canada is no angel on the matter either. Personally, if there is one failure of the entire west in the last 50 years, its our completely apathy towards the condition of the rest of the world.

At least with imperialism we were building these people schools and hospitals... now we just leave them to die. We have the resources to help these people... and it doesn't all have to be a "waste of money" as many describe it. A richer world makes us richer at home, by opening up new markets. China's new wealth is making us very rich right now, imagine if we could open up Africa to the same development.

Wow, my left switch has been turned on for the evening or something??? What the hell...

[crazymf]

Iraq is just like Vietnam on one account.

We get all the deserters and dodgers.

[Black Dog]

People who dismiss comparisons between Iraq and Vietnam on the basis of casualties are missing the point of such comparisons. Might as well dismiss them on the basis of one being a jungle and the other a desert.

[geoffrey]

And that they are fighting completely different types of battles.

Why must the left label everything as 'something-like'. It's like they can't seem to form opinions without having relation to something else. Especially a hyperbolic relationship that is founded more on emotion than fact.

The war in Iraq is the war in Iraq, not some Vietnam 2. It's a different war, in a different area, in a difference time, with a different enemy and different strategic and tactical concerns.

No realistic comparison.

[BubberMiley]

But the commonalities are they are both very unpopular, unnecessary quagmires that can never be won.

[geoffrey]

When has war ever been popular in modern times?

WW2 was even a tough sell.

[newbie]

A little levity:

Q. What's the difference between the Vietnam War and the Iraq War?

A. George W. Bush had a plan to get out of the Vietnam War.

[geoffrey]

A little levity:

Q. What's the difference between the Vietnam War and the Iraq War?

A. George W. Bush had a plan to get out of the Vietnam War.

[Michael Hardner]

When has war ever been popular in modern times?

WW2 was even a tough sell.

Gulf War I was pretty popular.

I don't like the comparisons to Vietnam either. There were far more casualties in that war, and a far different political environment, and media mix. It's almost as different to today as that war was to WWII.

There is a good side to the emotive response to Iraq, though. War has become politically untenable. The world's rich superpower won in a cakewalk, yet it still wasn't worth it for them.

Yes - the comparisons to Vietnam are irrational and humane. The old ways of war are dying...

[JerrySeinfeld]

When has war ever been popular in modern times?

WW2 was even a tough sell.

Gulf War I was pretty popular.

I don't like the comparisons to Vietnam either. There were far more casualties in that war, and a far different political environment, and media mix. It's almost as different to today as that war was to WWII.

There is a good side to the emotive response to Iraq, though. War has become politically untenable. The world's rich superpower won in a cakewalk, yet it still wasn't worth it for them.

Yes - the comparisons to Vietnam are irrational and humane. The old ways of war are dying...

This war is about far more than "WMD" or Terrorism.

It's about a presence in the middle east.

It's about saying to muslim rogue states: you will not run you shit free of our watch.

And guess what? Since the Iraq war began: decades of lebanon occupation has ended. Lybia gave up their weapons program. Even saudi arabia has started giving women rights - such as the vote. and if Iran keeps up their bullshit about nuking israel, the US is right there in the neighbourhood to keep it in check.

Anyone who thinks this war was started with the intention of pulling out in a couple of years was delusional.

This is a long term middle east project.

Stability? yep - we had "stability" in the middle east before the Iraq war. But what kind of "stability" was it?

A bunch of muslim states seething with terrorism and hate for the jewish state. Sure...SHORT TERM stability.

History will be much kinder to bush - the same way it was to Reagan. Remember all the lefties marching in the streets about reagan being a war monger? lol. he stayed the course and whooped the soviets.

Bush's doctrine is long-term thinking and intelligent.

At the end (and it may take decades) we will see less bullshit coming from the middle east.

Good on him. Keep it up GWB!

[GostHacked]

Anyone who thinks this war was started with the intention of pulling out in a couple of years was delusional.

This is one thing I can agree with you on JerryS. The US has no exit strategy. They are now there full time.

Difference

- amount of casualties and deaths

Similarity

- war on idealism

Differences

- one war was on communism / this one on terrorism. (all for the security of the US)

Similarity

- policy of regime change for a democratic society.

Similarity

- Hollywood making movies about Vietnam then, and Iraq now.

Difference

- they failed with Vietnam, it is STILL a communist country / Iraq results still pending.

[BubberMiley]

It's about saying to muslim rogue states: you will not run you shit free of our watch.

When you're not banned anymore, can you come back and tell us what this means? You will not run you shit?